Tuesday, August 01, 2006

A War Against Whom?

Jim Kouri, writing at Common Conservative, makes the case that this is more than a war against terror. Regular readers of Birdblog-as well as many of my recommended sites-will recognize this theme:

If I hear one more person on a news or talk show say that we're fighting a war against terrorism, I'm going to scream! If one more Bush Administration official says that Islam is a peaceful religion, get ready for another scream.

When we fought Nazi Germany during World War II, we were not fighting a war on blitzkriegs. When we declared war on Japan following their vicious sneak attack on Pearl Harbor, we were not fighting a war on militarism. Why do we continue to say we are at war against terrorism? First of all, terrorism is an ambiguous term. Today, I heard some liberal-left newsman on a radio show say that Israel was engaged in "state terrorism" against the Lebanese people. You have liberals within the US and Europe who call the United States a terrorist nation. How many times have you heard this nuggets of wisdom? "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter."

However, when you say we are at war against Islamofascism or radical Islam or Muslim extremists, there is far less ambiguity and much more focus on whom the enemy is in this current war.

2 Comments:

(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.[S.J.R.23]

So, who are we at war with? Those nations, organizations, or persons who had a role in the terrorist attacks of September 11th. Are we at war with North Korea? Can you show a nexus to 9/11? If not, then the answer is no. Are we at war with Syria? Again, can you show a nexus to 9/11?

S.J.R.23 only allows military action to be used when the president can demonstrate to the Congress a connection to the crimes committed on September 11th. Any other actions by our military, besides defense, would fall outside the AUMF and technically would be illegal.

Are we at war with Islamofascists, as Jim Kouri suggests? Yes and no. Yes, if there's a nexus to 9/11. No, if not.